From: Jim Seymour (jseymourLinxNet.com)
Date: Thu Dec 18 2003 - 08:32:46 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

"Roger B.A. Klorese" <rogerkqueernet.org> wrote:
>
> Craig Sanders wrote:
>
> >no, there is a difference in intent, and a difference in outcome (i.e. personal
> >profit vs community good deeds).
> >
> >by your extreme logic, requiring someone to perform some particular action to
> >get off a blacklist (e.g. securing their open relay) is also extortion.
> >
> >
>
> Correcting the problem that got them on there is appropriate. Any other
> requirement is not.

That's your *opinion*, and you're welcome to it. But that's all it is:
An opinion.

> When that requirement has monetary value, it's
> extortion.

Are you a lawyer? A judge? Even a para-legal? Licensed to practice
law in .au? (That's where SORBS is based, IIRC.) You can cite case
law to back up your assertion?

I'm not 100% sure but, IIRC, the operator of SORBS *has* consulted
legal professionals. (Paid out of his own pocket, no doubt.) If it
was truly extortion, I doubt he'd be doing it.

>
> If I kidnapped your child and gave the ransom to charity, is it any less
> a crime?

Analogies suck. Others suck more than others. SORBS is "kidnapping"
nothing. SORBS is publishing a list. Others chose to use that list of
their own volition. Presumably, like Craig, they've familiarized
themselves with the list operator's policies, and, unlike Craig and
you, are in agreement with them. By the same token: That list is owned
and operated solely by its maintainer. He can set whatever policies he
so-desires. Providing he breaks no laws (incl. libel and slander
laws), he's free to do as he desires with it. All that one may
reasonably expect is that the list accurately reflects its stated
policies, that users of the list may accurately determine whether those
policies match their own goals. SORBS *appears* to do that.

You may disagree with SORBS' policies. Personally, *I* think them a
questionable idea. Fine. Don't use it.

Btw: "To extort" does not require that money or other renumeration be
exchanged. So if requiring a donation is "extortion," so would be
requiring anything else. *Including* the listed entity addressing the
problem that caused them to be listed in the first place.

--
Jim Seymour | Spammers sue anti-spammers:
jseymourLinxNet.com | http://www.LinxNet.com/misc/spam/slapp.php
http://jimsun.LinxNet.com | Please donate to the SpamCon Legal Fund:
                           | http://www.spamcon.org/legalfund/

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]